Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers

Subject: Re: [boost] [Booster] Or boost is useless for library developers
From: Christopher Jefferson (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-16 03:11:01

On 16 May 2010, at 08:00, Artyom wrote:

>> those who are always caught in a "should we fix this
>> bug? it makes
>> applications break, but fixing it would break the ABI"
>> dilemma.
> 
> ABI compatibility should not prevent fixing bugs. This is important
> point. In fact libstdc++ manages its ABI for 6 years successfully,
> Qt does this very well too.
> 
> However you need to be prepared. You generally need at least one
> d-pointer/opaque-pointer/pimpl. You need to separate implementation
> and definitions (it would also increase compilation time, and
> reduce code size).

libstdc++ does none of these things. Instead what libstdc++ does is implement a fixed interface (as specified by the standard), and accepts the code is "ABI frozen", accepting the pain this can bring because ABI stability is important.

Chris